It's not the NFC the bank is interested it, it the MFA provided by your phone PIN, fingerprint or face unlock.
When you open the app on your phone, the phone probably needed to be unlocked first, though not everyone sets a PIN or biometric lock on their phone.
Then you will be prompted for a separate PIN or your fingerprint within the banking app. This provides a stronger signal to the bank that you are the legitimate account holder. If your phone is lost or stolen, the chances of someone else being able to authenticate to your banking app are considerably reduced.
With the web app, people will often save their bank website login credentials in the browser. So now someone nefarious only needs to access the unlocked computer or phone the go to the bank's website to gain unauthorised by still authenticated access to the customer's accounts.
Yes, there are now laptops and tablets with biometric authentication, so the potential is there for adding biometric authentication for banking website. However, when you look at the demographics of banking app vs website use, a strong majority of Millennials and Gen-Z do all their banking via the phone app. Gen-X also slightly favour the phone app whereas Boomers strongly prefer the website. So banks focus their development efforts where the majority of users are.
> When you open the app on your phone, the phone probably needed to be unlocked first, though not everyone sets a PIN or biometric lock on their phone.
The same is true for PCs. They've supported that sort of thing for decades, and it's optional for both the phone and the PC.
On top of that, a phone that people carry around everywhere is dramatically more likely to be lost or stolen than a desktop PC that never leaves their house.
> With the web app, people will often save their bank website login credentials in the browser.
If the bank actually cares about this then there are various ways to disable or impede it.
> However, when you look at the demographics of banking app vs website use
This is just the thing where you make something worse so fewer people use it and then use that as an excuse to keep making it worse. Nobody needs an app that could have been a web page, people use them because it's what get shoved down their throat if they don't go out of their way to do something else.
Swing with the Nimbus Look and Feel isn't too bad for a quick, functionality-focused widget and it's super handy to have it still built into the JDK. It's not a good option for building a long term desktop application UI now though. There is no on-going development, the focus is now in Java FX. Prior to AI tooling, finding answers to Swing questions was getting much harder. Surprisingly I've found Claude to be pretty good at providing simple Swing UIs.
How could you establish what parts of the code was produced by an LLM vs updated by a human afterwards?
The LLM will output different results over time as the models get updated. Are we heading towards needing to retain a full prompt history that can be replayed against a specific LLM model version to prove what the output was for copyright purposes?
The most likely option is that the status quo stays as it is: almost everything is copyrighted, nobody finds it worth it to defend their copyright because it's not worth very much.
That could be a real experience for children in the not too distant future.
We are seeing more and more appliances coming out with less buttons and a mobile app to access advanced features. Also cars (annoyingly) are coming out with more physical controls replaced by touchscreen interfaces. It's not hard to imagine a world without physical buttons becoming a reality.
The days of digital buttons might also be numbered. Apps designed for touched enabled interfaces, particularly on mobiles, support swipes and gestures to perform different actions. There is no obvious indication you can perform an action with a swipe or gesture. Having grown up pre-internet with physical buttons, dials, sliders etc I automatically look for the digital equivalent for interaction, I don't assume I can swipe or gesture to do something. I have to resort to searching for "how do I do x with y" to find out.
Children on the other hand spend a lot of time playing with new things. they are far more likely to discover swipe or gesture through play. As an adult I am much more task oriented, I'm not looking to play I'm looking to get the thing done.
As children grow up in a world without physical buttons, they may not see the relevance of digital equivalents and lean towards swipe, gesture, voice control etc. Digital buttons may disappear.
An example of an similar technological shift happened for many pre-Boomers with the introduction of Video Cassette Recorders (VCRs). My father grew up with analog clocks and watches. Time was told by two or three hands on a clock face. When VCRs became more affordable in the 80s they came with digital clocks. He could read the time off the digital display but couldn't make the leap to setting a recording time by putting it into program mode then using buttons to set a record start time and duration. To him, time was set by moving the clock hands or twisting a watch dial.
The introduction of flat-UI bothered me in it threw away a visual indication that this "thing" is a clickable button. I obviously not fully adapted to swipes and gestures. I feel like a few steps down the path for whatever the future equivalent of "can't program the VCR" is. I hope the advent of LLMs will make it easy enough for application developers to produce multiple UIs for different classes of user button users, swipe users, whatever the next thing is (brain wave control??).
This is probably going to push me to completely close a couple of AWS accounts I setup when doing training courses so I could get certified (mandatory requirement from my work).
I'm not currently running anything and have no plans to at the moment. I've always had a mild dread that I'll suddenly get a bill for more than $0.00.
If AWS can goof in a way that causes obviously massive bills (like today), what's to say they can't goof in more subtle ways and start charging small additional amounts that many people may not notice and just pay it.
When you open the app on your phone, the phone probably needed to be unlocked first, though not everyone sets a PIN or biometric lock on their phone.
Then you will be prompted for a separate PIN or your fingerprint within the banking app. This provides a stronger signal to the bank that you are the legitimate account holder. If your phone is lost or stolen, the chances of someone else being able to authenticate to your banking app are considerably reduced.
With the web app, people will often save their bank website login credentials in the browser. So now someone nefarious only needs to access the unlocked computer or phone the go to the bank's website to gain unauthorised by still authenticated access to the customer's accounts.
Yes, there are now laptops and tablets with biometric authentication, so the potential is there for adding biometric authentication for banking website. However, when you look at the demographics of banking app vs website use, a strong majority of Millennials and Gen-Z do all their banking via the phone app. Gen-X also slightly favour the phone app whereas Boomers strongly prefer the website. So banks focus their development efforts where the majority of users are.
reply